Policy Instruments

Approaches to Policy Instruments

The classical approach to defining policy instruments (1970–1985), rooted in the instrumentalist school of thought, has been largely supplanted because of its top-down and mechanical view of the world. It put quite some effort into a rather semantic discussion about the definition of a policy instrument, the risk of metaphors and reification, and the classification of policy instruments on the basis of their intrinsic characteristics. It claimed that the selection and consequently the application of instruments are made mainly on the basis of the characteristics of a specific instrument and its effects in terms of goal attainment. Soon it became clear that goal attainment cannot be attributed solely to the characteristics of instruments but that the characteristics of the context should also be taken into account.

The instrument–context approach (1985–1995) focused on the development of a theory of policy instruments that would enable policymakers to select the appropriate policy instrument for the problem at hand. The basis for selection of a policy instrument is not only the “logic of consequence” but also the “logic of appropriateness,” which includes “goodness of fit.” The attention for the context has led to what may be labeled “refined instrumentalism.”

Finally, instruments are considered one of the many variables in the contextual approach (1995–present) that takes policy implementation as a point of departure. The study of policy instruments merges with the study of implementation. The study of policy instruments has been affected as such by the developments in the field of implementation, notably the shift from implementation to governance.

...